Why Don't We Fix Faulty Political Systems?

[GAHD]

As for political experience, its backed up by a lifetime of observation, and a passing interest in politics. I have also travelled a lot more than most people and speak to a lot of people from different social backgrounds, with wildly different points of view.  

 

The part of the world I currently live in, people often don't lock their doors, no one carries guns, except some of the police, and the police don't appear to shoot anyone. So whilst this is nominally a poorer country than America, and not the wealthiest in Europe, the politicians are getting it right, with far less resources, and the quality of life is in general better than in many wealthier countries. 

 

Is the thread about failing political systems or your infatuation with your tool. :)

Title and preamble seems more about fixing faults in them, and the difficulties inherent in that.

If you want to talk about a topic(Eg, firearms) in a political and regulatory light, don't be surprised when reason and statistics not based on "my snowflake feelings" are brought up. If you want to spin some accusation when I've directly answered you on your own brought up points (and irony of you deleting your own posts to "save face" or some other strange reasoning) You might want to think BEFORE you press the Post button, rather than trying to recover from a gaffe well after the fact.

It's also worth it to answer questions directly, particularly ones that do pertain to the core topic.

EG:

People are free to not buy a product from a company they don't like the ethics of. They are NOT free to "not buy" a government mandated service. This is a classic debate of personal choices, freedoms, and oversight. What about your local laws and bylaws? Do they actually protect your rights and freedoms as they are currently implemented?

(unanswered)

 

Weather individuals should be forced to pay for those research grants or MIC contracts or whatnot (at gunpoint) is a different topic. Maybe someone's happy living in the mountains raising their own crops and cattle. Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for the trappings of roads, electric vehicle subsidies, water purification, new battery technology, and other things they do not use and do not want? Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for healthcare they don't use? Why should they be forced (at gunpoint) to pay for anything they don't directly benefit from?

(unanswered)

[GAHD]

You have lost it :) The thread is why-dont-we-fix-faulty-political-systems. If you want to start a thread on firearms go ahead make my day :(  I wont post on it. 

not at all what I said, but I'm guessing your cognitive dissonance isn't allowing you to process things correctly, particularly those twice-quotes questions directly related to faulty political systems and how they need fixing. I'm guessing the dissonance is exasperated by some cultural inability to admit fault or wrongdoing. It's a common trend even if it's a sad one for humanity as a whole.

[DanielBoyd]

In a two party state first past the post works. When more parties are involved first past the post is not representative of the electorate. Tactical voting sways the vote, and does not give a true picture, ie if you would like to vote for a Green party and know they have no chance, voting for another candidate from another party who stands a better chance to beat a candidate who you definitely don't want elected, is the way people vote. Some sort of transferable vote if your preferred candidate loses to another candidate might work, and be more representative of the electorate.

 

 

I live in Holland where we have a lot of (probably a little too many!) political parties. You vote for a party rather than for a local candidate. This solves the problem of votes for minority parties being lost (e.g. Lib Dem votes in the UK). If a party just gets 2% of the votes spread over the whole of Holland, these voters still get a representatieve in parliament. Just one example of an alternative (and fairer) voting system.

 

Winner-takes-all is in my view a disastrously undemocratic system. Take the Brexit referendum. 49% of votes cast are taken as irrelevant because 51% voted to leave. "The people have spoken?" Nope, 51% have spoken just a little louder than 49%.

[DanielBoyd]

 

Politicians should be prosecuted for deliberate misinformation, not in a countries interests. It should come under treason. (Tony Blair Iraq war for example) (Boris Johnson Brexit) Loss of pension rights, and kicked out of office with no right to stand for office ever again, might be a minor deterrent. Prison might be more effective. 

 

 

Totally agree with you on this one. It is utterly ludicrous that Facebook (that doesn't present itself as a new outlet) gets pummelled for the drivel its social-media users produce and share, while politicians can lie through their teeth and get away with it. There was a recent attempt to take Boris Johnson to court for misinformation but it failed. Not a good precendent. If I was to talk utter nonsense in my job I'd soon be out on the street, but politics seems to actually foster bending/breaking the truth. Perhaps an extension of the debating principle, but no excuse.

 

What you propose would be a certainly be a great step forward in redesigning the political system. The judicial system (in most countries) is supposed to be politically independent. So why don't we have that law?.  

Edited September 5, 2019 by DanielBoyd

[LaurieAG]

Voter apathy in Brexit had something like 12 million voters in the UK who didn't vote out of a total of 30million ish who did. Was that 12 million people who abstained because they didn't give a ****, or did not understand what they were voting for. Out of the 52% who voted for Brexit, many of them were pensioners, many of whom presumably are now dead. If the vote was to be held again, I suspect it would be a landslide in the opposite direction. This is likely because people are finally realizing they were lied to or those stupid enough to vote for Brexit have popped there clogs :(

 

If you just keep on trying until you get the electoral answer you want then why don't you be consistent and just dump Double Jeopardy laws and the Magna Carta at the same time.

 

Corbyn (left wing) was elected by 60% of his parties members and he was pro Brexit but 70% of the parties MP's (obviously right wingers) wanted to dump him after the Brexit vote was successful.

 

Probably the best way to fix it is to send all of the right wingers to the right wing party and all of the left wingers into the left wing party as the current feral mongrel parties don't know whether they are coming or going.